@Srtest wrote:
Quote:

I don't think you need to define a platform just as the Amiga is a platform and being a platform doesn't say anything. Is linux needs defining?

I guess there are two trains of thought. One, that Amiga IS the OS, and two, Amiga is the OS and the hardware.

I define Amiga as the latter, OS and hardware. For me everything else is along the lines of emulation. That's just me.

I'm not talking about 68k hardware, but I cannot accept ever changing commodity hardware, and neither will hardware developers.

As stated before, the only true new (NG) Amiga is the laptop because they are all the same. If A-EON makes changes to the hardware on the second or third run then they will only be Amiga in name.

Time for my pills.

_________________
Tinkering with computers.

@Signal

If you'll excuse me I'd like to continue with the metaphor of that response: is the journey about being able to leave the original chipset and move to a card-based model? you need to ask yourself if our road is an upgraded one where the starting point was a fixed chipset that was almost never upgraded. That does raise questions about the connection between hardware and software however uncomfortable they might be for purists, especially when you consider the gem that was 3.1 happened while establishing the software side as a self-reliance kind of enterprise which eventually gave it some independence going forward. That was also a part of what allowed it to survive without any hardware development at its core base and relying on expansions. If you look at the outside world in those years after C collapsed, everything was about expansions even if the core was stagnant and rotten. At least for us the core was so good that 30 years later it still carried a unique value to many. That is why I can't say it's one thing and not another thing because we all took different directions after C and it shaped the way the platform had changed. That said, this is also not a history lesson. We are not talking about neratives. I wish I really had something to say here seeing as I bought an expensive X1k and is using AOS4.1FE with a modern gpu. That machine is kinda a mix between different Amiga notions don't you think? the result however is a little bit unclear. Maybe it's part of the road. That is why I also don't view it as "ng". It is a modern take while the question remains - of what? the vamp is also a different take of a classic machine - so what do you get and why?

This is also about control not just about a single company holding the Amiga IP. You open source the os you risk it being exploited and cannibalized by forces which are always looking to one-up each other on their zero sum game. You don't open source anything you risk of lacking an important tool on the way forward. They have openPower machines these days where the processor is also open. Regarding the Amiga software and games piracy was considered a major blow while I can say that without it I wouldn't have been an Amigan where I live as some basic stuff was out of reach financially. So this is also about affordability. You need a community to go through all the nueances.

Last edited by Srtest on 15-Dec-2016 at 12:01 AM.

@Srtest

in short NG is "too modern" and not amigan enough for the "purists" but neither enough modern enough nor offering sufficient software to attract new users outside. And to really make a difference it is too late today because only few software developers left. 68k based solutions too also are only attractive to people who are interested in the old platform (former amigans mostly propably) but it is at least different to mainstream hardware. That is in my view not the case for X1000 f.e., mainstream hardware that is just more expensive and bad supported by both OS and drivers.

Quote:

Timberwolf was named Timberwolf for the sole reason of Hyperion

Once again (Kronos) trying to spread lies. Like Signal said already, Timberwolf was private Frieden project and not Hyperion's. Mozilla Foundation supervises who can use Firefox brand and who doesn't. Hyperion is not Mozilla Foundation and doesn't own Mozilla Foundation.

@all

It's amusing to watch these few individuals being still on a crusade against Hyperion. Using lies against Hyperion where they wasn't even involved in.

I think these quotes might explain the reason for such crusade:
Quote:

Amiga Inc. doesn't own anything AmigaOS related anymore

Quote:

And we have an open OS variant, AROS Quote: which doesn't bear THE NAME. And without THE NAME, it's pointless.

_________________
Rock lobster bit me. My Workbench has always preferences. X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE
"Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray

@Tomppeli

Actually the port of fuse from MorphOS does come to mind.


Quote:

The software licenses require that the source code be made available so registered users can download the matching source code from Hyperion’s web site in the downloads section.

which was done intentionally to make source being reused harder.

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@terminills

Quote:

which was done intentionally to make source being reused harder.

Not at all, it was just to save on bandwidth costs.

FWIW I've posted alternative download links in the past which don't require registration:

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=33223&forum=14&start=740&viewmode=flat&order=0#728921
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=33223&forum=14&start=760&viewmode=flat&order=0#728945
http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2769#p31089

Also here is a link to Steven Solie's response on the matter:

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=33223&forum=14&start=740&viewmode=flat&order=0#728926

@OlafS25

You know what? I have grown tired of this banter and actually have other things to do (can you believe?). Forget about Amiga - which is very difficult! so just for a second while I try to answer this the best way I can: you seek value? cause I seek it. Even Trevor seeks it. It's one of the focal points of living today, you feel detached from stuff you were supposed to value and are left with a void. Then comes another situation where again you need to value something. Do you value software? for anyone who (at least) spent a couple of years before the ultra-mediated era of today, you need something a little bit more tangible. You need to feel the value not just as people relate to something. It's not easy to value good software or even ingenuity like with Amiga os throughout the generations. It feels closer to home when you've got a piece of hardware and for someone who grew up on Amiga that piece better have some unique charactaristic.

When do I value software? the answer might surprise you. The common notion is that getting stuff for free or stealing via piracy make you lose value for whatever is achieved whenever someone makes a great effort and produces whatever moves us forward and in my book entertainment can also be that and that is something I learned while growing up on the correct hardware... In recent times online services of software and deals have surfaced and accomplished great success. That intangible industry it by games and for games and making buisness with that industry made me value titles like Deus Ex more than ever because it made it close - you immediately add it to your collection and you feel the price is fair. It's not surprising that the ultra-stagnant Hollywood is the one who is most scared of those services because they create a new and better connection to intangibles while giving them value according to enjoyment and money's worth. Lets just say and I will conclude that other than The Hobbit and maybe some Riddick I haven't been to a movie in like 10 years amongst the attack of the comic movies, while I've been expanding my collection like my day did with records and books. Those can be viewd as hardware just as much as software. Maybe we deal here with something that is both like a special book (including everything that makes a book - a book) and which yearns for a state of the art browser of words to bring more interests to accompany that book. Do books have a platform? are a platform?

Last edited by Srtest on 16-Dec-2016 at 03:55 AM.

@Srtest,

+1, lol....

@salass00

I know YOU had no intention of keeping the source out of reach... However I don't buy the bandwidth story from ssolie as it's been years since bandwidth was expensive or even metered for that matter.

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@Tomppeli

Same people, same attitude, same results....

Sure, Mozilla sets the rules for useing the Firefor-TM.

Guess which one Timberwolf didn't fullfill

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@OlafS25

Quote:

Hyperion obviously is not interested in helping others or cooperation.

I don't think that they have this option at their disposal in the first place but cooperating with third parties (open source or otherwise) is generally revenue positive.

Quote:

Cloanto also still earns money, they sell the roms.

And open-sourcing the OS would introduce a threat in what way?

Again, whoever makes the code open source (in whole or in part) controls the licensing and what can be done with it. No one is suggesting that it should simply be cut loose. Major OS vendors do this all the time.

And it's mind-boggling to me that Cloanto and the Vampire team aren't working together to improve compatibility with 3.x and bundle the ROMs.

I don't think it's a question of protecting existing interests. It's simply an inability to appreciate that opportunities come from collaboration.

Pick up the phone, jump on IRC, send an e-mail. It's amazing how modern technology can be used to communicate these days.

@iggy

Quote:

we have an open OS variant, AROS

Quote:

we have two proprietary PPC OS

And this level of fragmentation is precisely why this community is constantly in a state of flux. It's a rudderless ship.

The answer to everything is always the same: just use something else.

How about one of these players stepping up their game and offering a solution that people actually want to buy?

@Tomppeli

Quote:

Like Signal said already, Timberwolf was private Frieden project and not Hyperion's. Mozilla Foundation supervises who can use Firefox brand and who doesn't. Hyperion is not Mozilla Foundation and doesn't own Mozilla Foundation.

Now that's interesting. So would this also cover those who can port Firefox to a platform and if they can call it Firefox or some other name?

There used to be names like SeaMonkey for Debian IIRC, which looks like a "port" of the name, since it just converts Firefox into another enviroment and animal.

I recall the official reason for Firefox not being called Firefox and instead Timberwolf on OS4 was because they couldn't name it Firefox on a PPC platform. But this reason was not good and enough and simply not the case. Ubuntu Linux PPC includes Firefox and it's called... Firefox. A PPC platform. Next try please and stop trying to pull the wool over my wolf.

@Hypex

The MPL includes a clause that you can create non opesource versions of Mozilla/Firefox aslong as you use a different name. Purpose of this was allowing Netscape to update Navigator based on those sources.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

This has been quite funny as I keep mentioning Mozilla in a broader sense and you bring it up to discuss issues you have with open sourcing and Hyp. Mozilla as a presence in the computing world and the similarities it shares with Amiga and Amiga's history. Now when you bring up Netscape things get interesting: netscape was a browser that had done something right and was crushed by the brutal monopoly. FF is not simply a continuation of the Navigator just as Mozilla are not netsacpe, but not in a way which is so obvious - one is open sourced and the other is not. The netscape browser was actually pretty open in its basic model and the user interface was the preliminary to FF where the community was given a large part of that browser. Mozilla took that work to a direction of the community and the thing that made FF and set it apart from everythig else at the time was its reliance, support and communication with the community not neccesarily it being open source according to the mpl. This takes the discussion (in circles but nonetheless) again to the opennes of the basic model alongside the ability to create a communicative module in the primary software or part of the software people use and contribute to. This is like Amiga at the beginning creating a structure which put the user first and designed the parts to always allow whatever is in the foreground to master those resources to their fullest. Then came the increasing reliance on the community's contributions which eventually gave birth to more of a small parts based model where the contributions were a part of the os and which its various uses could depend upon. That's why it's really not suprising that in amigaland software became much more central to advancement than hardware, which is similar to how the portability of Mozilla became a priority over its freedom of use and expansion. You see? again this might be bigger than either Mozilla or Amiga... some call it culture and the nature of technology, especially about idealistic, people first enterprises.

Last edited by Srtest on 17-Dec-2016 at 08:04 PM.
Last edited by Srtest on 17-Dec-2016 at 07:54 PM.

@OlafS25

Except that I am an outsider for the most part as I did not use Amiga hardware when Commodore was a going concern.
And its modern enough for me.
Why don't you do your own thinking and let others make their minds up on their own.
And btw, Amiga "purists" can be real nimrods.

_________________
Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"

@Hypex

Quote:

I recall the official reason for Firefox not being called Firefox and instead Timberwolf on OS4

There used to be quite strict requirements you had to meet in order to be allowed to use the Firefox trademark. If you did more than just compile the unchanged sourcecode, you basically had to get all of your changes approved by Mozilla - there's no way the Frieden brothers could ever have achieved that without a lot more manpower and money. Maybe they didn't actually want to comply with Mozilla's rules, as Kronos claims - they did speak out against Free Software quite often - but that never mattered simply because there was no way to actually use the Firefox branding for an OS4 port back then (things have gotten a lot better, as far as Firefox branding is concerned).

@Srtest :

Quote:

idealistic, people first enterprises.

You need professional help.

@cgutjahr

If I need professional help because I know what can bring people here, people that maybe on a personal level I wouldn't have much regard for the reason they come here, and you talk about "the brand", then I guess it's good Amiga was made up by the slightly deranged instead of the pathetic like on your favorite platforms. I guess I wear it as a badge of honor. If you need a translation so it would be simpler for you don't hesitate because as I write using a second language I do it constantly even if it's tiresome and banal.

@cgutjahr

Quote:

There used to be quite strict requirements you had to meet in order to be allowed to use the Firefox trademark.

That would make sense since the code base would have needed a lot of changes. And just to compile it. I don't recall this being mentioned. But I am going off memory here. No wonder then they would need to rename it since the result was an incomplete port and not what it should have been to match the original.